Nissan might not be in the greatest financial position it’s ever seen, but at least it’s not giving up on enthusiast cars. A less passionate company would’ve cancelled a future flagship, but between an R36 GT-R seeming like an eventual inevitability and warp-speed plans on the next Xterra, Nissan still isn’t afraid to let product talk. On the enthusiast side of things, that starts with putting a manual transmission in the Z Nismo.
See, the current Z Nismo launched with a nine-speed automatic that’s both quicker than a six-speed manual and a failure to read the room. Now that electric cars have thoroughly laid the zero-to-60 mph argument to rest, the culture’s hot topic has shifted back towards engagement. You can’t shift a manual gearbox as quickly as an automatic can shift itself, but you get to do the shifting.
Now, Nissan’s set to rectify this oversight. The automaker dropped a teaser of what it has in store for Tokyo Auto Salon, although it’s less of a teaser and more of a full-on announcement. Not only has Nissan stated “In pursuit of driving excitement and performance, the NISMO MT, a new Z NISMO option featuring a manual transmission, will be offered for customers looking for a heightened driving experience,” it has also released this photo:
Yeah, I’d say there isn’t much room for interpretation here. However, while bolting a manual into the Z Nismo might appease the internet for a day along with a few hardcore fans, there’s a bigger issue at play with the Z as an object in itself.
While I haven’t driven the expensive range-topping Nismo model, I have driven a mid-range Z Performance, and I came away disappointed. Not just as someone who likes performance cars, but for someone who poured his money into a stick-shift Infiniti G35 on the same platform. The ridiculously notchy six-speed shifter in that mid-aughts sports sedan was addictive, a viscous limited-slip differential was better than an open job, and the result was simply two handfuls of fun. Sure, design for serviceability was terrible, and noise, vibration and harshness weren’t as well-damped as on an E46 BMW 3 Series, but the result was a real performance car with talkative steering, reasonably taut damping, and bushings firm enough to add feel.
In contrast, the latest Z took some of my favorite traits of past Nissan FM cars and ran them through the “Men In Black” memory-holer. The shifter? Quite rubbery. A limited-slip diff? An expensive option in an age when many competitors offer them as standard. Oh, and then there was the bizarre balance of NVH and suspension tuning. The new Z somehow manages to be both loud and soft, as if the level of sound deadening’s still 20-plus-years old but all the ball joints and hydrobushings are filled with custard. It’s a stellar cruiser for the noise-insensitive, but not a hugely confidence-inspiring sports car.
There is, however, what I like to call the Midwest exception. If the roads in your local area feature loads of potholes and few corners, 400 horsepower for $44,215 isn’t a terrible deal. After all, what else can you still get for sub-$45,000? A 200-horsepower Prelude probably won’t scratch the straight-line itch, and while a Subaru BRZ is a fantastic sports car, it now starts at a whopping $37,055 including freight. If you won’t really be using the cornering prowess, adding nearly 200 horsepower and shaving roughly a second off your zero-to-60 mph time for an extra $7,160 might be justifiable. At the same time, a base Mustang GT offers a more refined, better-damped, limited-slip diff-equipped experience for an extra $5,035, but it doesn’t dole out the cheap party drug of boost. Want to compromise the warranty on a Z? Even a piggyback like Burger Motorsports’ JB4 can add nearly 60 horsepower and more than 100 lb.-ft. of torque at the wheels.
Indeed, horsepower combined with everything else growing more expensive means that Z sales aren’t doing too badly. Through the third quarter of 2025, Nissan sold 4,822 of the things across America. That might not sound like a huge number, but it’s okay for a sports car in this climate. For context, Toyota sold just 2,009 Supras over the same timespan, but 8,107 GR86s. Thus, the real issue with the current Nissan Z appears: It’s simply too expensive for what you get.
An ancient platform can be good provided some of that old-school feel is capitalized on, but Nissan hasn’t quite managed that. Instead, comfort concessions come in the form of squidginess that doesn’t appease shoppers looking for something quiet and modern or shoppers looking for a taste of yesteryear. At the same time, some of the equipment packaging just seems mean. A rental-spec Ford Mustang Ecoboost has a limited-slip rear differential, but to get one on a Z, you’re looking at spending $54,215 on the Performance trim. Other things locked out of the entry-level trim? A glovebox damper and wireless Apple CarPlay, niceties you get with even the cheapest Mustang.
I mention the Mustang because it’s the Z’s natural enemy in America, another punchy coupe based on slightly older bones that might not dance like a sharp sports car in the bends, but will pin you back in your seat in a straight line. To really compete with America’s original pony car, Nissan ought to add a limited-slip differential to the base Z without moving the needle on pricing any higher, then tighten the spread between it and the Performance trim. A stick-shift Nismo model is neat, but with the automatic Z Nismo already retailing for $66,995, it’s out of reach of many buyers. If I may be so bold, don’t facelift it, don’t update it, just make it cheaper, and people will come.
Top graphic image: Nissan
A real diff and a manual in a 400hp sports car seems like a screaming deal at $45k, less so at 55+… Ran into the same issue 10 years ago when cross shopping a Miata and a BRZ, LSD was mandatory and the Subaru ended up in the ballpark of 10k less once the Mazda was optioned up to include one.
Nissan can do one thing to completely fix most of these issues.
a decent set of tires.
when I got mine it was so twitchy and just not enjoyable to drive, When I switched out the wheels and tires around 1000 km in that suddenly changed and it’s such a blast to drive.
oh and here in australia there is no model with no LSD so i guess Nissan Australia already got that memo..
So they’ll be a great used value soon? Works for me, I’ll be needing a commuter, stupid RTO. I haven’t had to commute in almost ten years. I’m going to have to rethink the fact that between my wife and kids, we already have five cars, do I REALLY need another?
The answer of course, is yes. I’m immediately thinking Miata, but fighting Chicago traffic in such a little booger seems unappealing. It can’t be too nice as I’ll have to perpetually park on the street. Maybe an Avalon might be just the ticket. Stop pretending that I would want a manual to row through traffic and just enjoy the pillow-soft life of a mushy sofa on wheels knowing it won’t ever break.
I think you’re on the right track at the end, there. Something you don’t care too much about and won’t annoy you in city traffic sounds like the ticket.
Now, if it could also be a little fun to be in, that wouldn’t be so bad…
I love the look, am intrigued by the performance, but when I went to check one out, I was surprised by the uter lack.of practically. It is a bulbus car with an extremely small trunk. It has about the proportions of a Porsche 944 but about 1/4 of the cargo space. I was very seriously interested in it as a modern sports car to use as a daily to replace my BMW e36 M3, but the fact that there is very little usable storage makes it a tough sell as a daily driver.
2 seat sports cars will always be a niche market as 2nd or 3rd cars or DD’s for only the most hardcore fanatics (mainly young owners with money/credit, pre-family age). A reasonable expectation for an OEM is that these aren’t cars making meaningful contribution to their bottom line because volume is so limited by the total addressable market. However the reputational significance is huge. If you stiff an actual prospective buyer or buyer-in-spirit with bad options, bad design, bad dealers, etc the effect is much worse to the OEM because that would-be buyer thinks the whole brand doesn’t “get it.” And since the brand has lost the enthusiast plot, their buyer writes off the whole company until they get it right the next time and talks about it ad nauseum until then. It’s simple – light, quick, simple, analog, manual, under $50k, able to hot lap (LSD or AWD) and handle a commute or road trip. It won’t sell a ton but it will be praised and brand equity will pay for itself.
What you say? A car more expensive and slower than a mustang that won’t sell…. Will also not sell.
Surprised Pikachu
Don’t forget it’s also a 2-seater with a smaller trunk and only weighs 120lb less than a GT.
The Mustang has always been relatively inexpensive power.
In 89 you could pick up a new Fox Body Mustang LX 5.0 (6.1 to 60) for under $13k and yet it’s more expensive rivals like the Prelude with only a 4 banger (8.5 to 60 / $17.5K) and the BMW 325is (7.4 to 60 / $28k!!!) also sold like hot cakes. Never mind that the base Miata came along at $14k and became an automotive icon.
I see no difference today. Having spent a week with a Mustang Convertible in LA, it’d definitely not a car that i’d buy in spite of there being many things to like about it. The Z has manual climate control which on it’s own might be worth the price of entry. But in any case you can get into a Z for less than a comparable base Mustang GT.
I got myself an 06 Infiniti G35 sedan with the manual several years back. Had a 96 Miata M-spec at the same time and I was hopeful that it could possibly replace it since my wife was pushing for something a bit bigger/safer.
I can’t tell you how many times I stalled that car. I had been driving stick for at least 20 years at that point and just could not get the clutch pick up right. It was worse than a manual RX8 which was the quietest, smoothest engined car I have ever driven.
I really wanted to like that car but it was gone within 2 months of buying it. Don’t really know what anybody sees in that platform aside from a loud UPS truck exhaust and cheap entry
Comon Nissan! You kept the great R200 diff with LSD behind a paywall.. on some old, stock cars I get it but the TT Z car? Should be stock equipment.
I saw a new TT 400z doing a shameful one tire fire burner earlier this summer.. weak sauce
I’ve seen a couple of these. Maybe not the bee knees for sporting prowess but I think they look fantastic. I’ve seen a few more of the new Supras than the Z. Those look really nice too but I prefer the more subdued look of the Nissan.
I also love the look. But Thomas makes good points here about the lack of features at lower trims. How is Wireless Apple CarPlay part of the dang Performance trim?!
Agreed, they look amazing
I am pretty sure I haven’t actually seen one in person yet.
But I do agree. They look pretty fantastic. I just wish they were about 20% smaller overall.
I have seen 1 of the “new” Z’s on the road since it was introduced.
I have seen 1 of them on a delivery truck.
I drive 70+ miles a day 5-6 days a week in central PA and I think this market has forgotten about this car.
I’ve seen more Murano Cabs.
I’m up to 3. I’ve seen far more Ferraris here, and we’re not all rich.
Here’s a terrible take, but one I believe to be true.
Speed sells, and fun sells. But for speed and fun to sell, it has to sell in numbers great enough to offset the cost of development, and make a profit.
Engineering ain’t cheap. Cars ain’t cheap. Cars that have the engineering behind them to rise above the competition DEFINITELY ain’t cheap.
And so we have this, a fun, pretty coupe on the market for about $40k to start. Nissan probably doesn’t make much money on the base model, and neither do the dealers. So the average Z car available on a dealer lot isn’t going to be at that base price. Even still, let’s pretend that it is.
Here’s the 1st kicker.
What is the target buyer for a 2 door sports car? It’s a guy who wants performance and driving engagement.
The people who truly want performance and engagement typically value those qualities above all else, and will make sacrifices to obtain that.
Here’s the 2nd kicker:
Used cars exist, and a LOT of people that value performance and driving engagement aren’t above sacrificing the idea of new car ownership to get what really matters to them.
So if you have the income to support a $40,000 car, and what you really want is performance and engagement, the Z isn’t competing against mustangs and supras. It’s competing against gently used M cars, stick shift hellcats, Corvettes and GT350s.
I love the Z, and I want it to succeed. But if I have 40 grand burning a hole in my pocket, it’s going to take a lot more than a stick shift option to make me consider it over a very nice C7 Z06 for 37k.
There are people that would still rather have a new Z car. Just not in the tens of thousands.
I’m assuming you mean a C6 Z06 for 37k, it looks like the C7s are about $50k at the lowest with a quick autotrader search.
Got me excited for a second thinking the C7 market crashed or something.
Nah sorry I meant Z06, but typed in “used c7 Z06” and the first one that popped up for me looked like one, but it was in fact just a stingray. Still, a LOT of fun for the money there.
A base C7 with the Z51 pack would be the way to go. Grand sport even better, but that gets you back up to $50k.
Every time one of these topics comes up, I can’t help but see where the Camaro 1LE prices are sitting. Decent 2017-2018 examples are down to the low $30k range and still a bargain for the level of performance you get.
That’s if you’re even looking for a track day capable car. If you just want something hilarious to drive, there are 6.4l Challengers trading in the mid 20’s now.
25 grand is a pretty attractive price for 470 horsepower, a manual, and a useable back seat.
I’m just… not a Dodge fan. I had a ’18 1LE, sold it to Vroom at the tail end of the Covid price craziness. Been waiting for used prices to drop below the $30k mark.
That’s fine, I’m totally aware of the legendary status of BMW M-cars and I just find them to be so…..completely boring. Everyone has stuff they’re just not into.
But my point stands! You could sub out dodge for ford or Chevy and and insert whatever. I mean, let’s use chevys. You can pick up a 2014 2 SS Camaro for less than the most “affordable”compact crossovers.
If you have 25 grand or can swing 500 a month, and don’t have anti-domestic snobbery holding you back, Ford and GM will sell you a WEAPON. Go up to 50k, you start getting into used cars that have limits that are higher than most average Joe’s have the ability to probe. So that naturally becomes some of the competition.
That and the fact this even looks like its predecessor 370Z, and even that has the same bones as the 350Z. I’d be looking for a good used 350Z for this use case.
I think I’m in the minority in that old bones don’t bother me. I’d still LOVE a 370Z, I think they’re an awesome car and I want them to continue existing, if that means it has to have an old platform, so what? That just means that 15-20 years from now parts will be in common with more and more years of that car, making it an even better platform for young enthusiasts to enjoy.
Look at Jeep with their Wrangler or Toyota with their Tacoma. You get a new generation every 11 years, which is wild, until you realize that absolutely nobody buying these actually gives half a shit about a 5 percent bump in efficiency and a 10 percent bump in torsional rigidity.
We see that a 30,000 mile 2018 wrecked Tacoma engine will bolt right into a 2011, we can pull a 4.10 rubicon axle out of a junkyard 2008 and slap it right into our 2017, so forth and so on.
It’s okay to not be on the bleeding edge of development every 3 years, and Nissan can’t afford that anyway.
One exception:
It needs t-tops. Ot at least a targa top.
As someone who spent a LOT of time in the 80s in various t-top 300 Z cars, I’m happy to leave those behind. But I’m an old man now and maybe the youth do want this.
Yeah… I want them now *because* I missed out on one in the 80’s (and because I have faith that they’ll be made better in 2025).
A manual Nismo absolutely fixes the Z.
It might not fix its sales numbers, but in isolation it makes the car desirable where it was not.
The Z is morbidly obese at 3,700 lbs. That’s almost as much as that fat pig of a Mercedes 300 SDL I used to drive.
Get a curb weight with a 2 in front of it and I’ll take it seriously as a sports car.
Yeah, its up about 400lbs on the base model from the original 350Z version, but, weirdly, its only gained about 100 for the top trim/fully optioned version
Gt350 was heavy too. Big brakes behind big big rims adds wieght. Body requires some reinforcement too. So its not light to make a 500hp car of any kind.
My Cramro was also 3700lbs, but it hid that weight well.
Mustang GT is 3800+ lbs.
I saw one the other day. First time ever. I love Z cars. Dad had a 280, I have a 280zx.
Nissan doesn’t know how to sell these.
“just make it cheaper, and people will come.”
Stick all the auto execs in a cornfield and whisper this to them.
The fact that this exists at all is mostly a sign that Nissan is worth saving.
Yeah, yeah, too expensive, not as good as before, less engaging, blah blah blah.
Treasure these things before they’re gone.
Is that the current 7th Gen is, effectively, the same as the old 6th gen Z with the updated VR engine from the VQ.
And that hearkens back to 2008.
Jesus tap dancing Christ a Toyobaru now starts at $37,000? That might be the single biggest argument in favor of the Z at this point. That being said, they really did waste a lot of potential with this car. I think it looks incredible and the performance per dollar value on the base trim is fantastic…but between dealer shenanigans and locking the performance bits that are often standard behind a $10,000 paywall really dampens the mood.
Also I haven’t driven one but the general consensus seems to be that the manual isn’t very good, which doesn’t help it either. If you’re one of those people that prioritizes manuals over all else and makes them your entire personality I could certainly see finding a Civic Type R a whole lot more appealing in this price bracket. There’s also the Mustang of course, although sales of the S650 have been very poor because, like this and seemingly everything these days, it’s way too goddamn expensive.
Launching the Nismo as an automatic only affair was also just a self-own that’s beyond comprehension. Anyway what I’ve been saying for years is that if they sold a totally stripped down version with the better brakes and differential at $39,999 this car probably would’ve succeeded. Anyway, I still like them and they’re already bleeding value so I may pick one up as a weekend car in a few years.
Despite all the warts I fail to see how a 400 rear wheel drive horsepower coupe could be anything but fun.
Jesus tap dancing Christ a Toyobaru now starts at $37,000?
No, starts at $30,800. Though the way you truly want it? $37-40K before taxes, etc.
Miata is $29,830. Though a Club with the Brembo/BBS/Recaro pack is $39,465.
So yeah, the floor for a new “sports car” with all the go fast bits is $40K-ish OTD.
That’s tragic
In April 2007, I bought an NC-1 Miata Grand Touring, Manual with LSD and Bilsteins. MSRP was $28,600, I paid a lot less. All the go fast bits, with a stick, in red… was a hard sell as the market was slowly starting to lock up.
CPI inflation calculator says today that’d be $44,850 before tax, etc.
Obviously, the difference between then and now is earning power hasn’t kept up (and other costs are much higher), but the actual prices have kept with or below inflation. Lack of disposable income is the biggest obstacle right now.
Though thing is… yet fewer people buy sports cars? They need to recoup those costs somehow. Everyone wants the cars, but a lot of engineering time has to be dedicated to them, for potentially a small fraction of the profit of making a far more successful high production model. Ultimately they are things car companies do because the people working at them REALLY love those cars, so they push forward. Though if sales numbers dwindle, either the same thing gets sold for yet longer, the price goes up, the cars stop being made, or all three.
Does racing kind of go away? If you can’t buy a street car that wants to track, do enthusiasts just give up?
Subaru dropped the lower trim BRZ, but the GR86 still offers it for about $30k. LSD is standard as are the better riding, smaller wheels (budget to swap tires as the base tires are trash). Bigger brakes are a lot cheaper as DIY than the overpriced higher trim, but performance pads are a cheap upgrade for the street and recommended as the stock pads are underwhelming. Other than that, it’s heated seats, steering headlights, and some garbage alcantara trim for the higher level.
That’s good. I honestly probably wouldn’t even spring for the higher trims of that car unless I was going to seriously track it. If you’re just going to drive it on the street you really don’t need the braking upgrade. A decent set of tires is enough for the vast majority of people.
That is accurate. Though, I would still recommend upgrading the pads, t’s not a day 1 sort of thing. I don’t see the point of the fancy dampers off the track, either. According to the onboard read out, the car will pull just over 1g with mid range HPAS tires of stock 215 width and still rides respectably well. How much more can you really exploit on the street?
every car is too expensive these days. The Mfrs are pricing the fun cars for the higher end. not sure why except margins. sports cars in the 60s and 70s were cheap fun. now they are pricey toys. such a bummer. but then again, the OEMs want margin. Nobody wants to stock stick cars either, cause “what can I get you in today?”
Right? I paid $28,700 out the door for my new MANUAL BRZ Limited in 2017. Yes, the tires sucked and yes it was underpowered. But spiritually, it was more a successor to the original S30-chassis Z cars than the current offering from Nissan, and oh so much fun.
The argument I’ll make is the Z starts at the price it does BECAUSE they only can only sell maybe 6000ish of them a year in the US. As @JTilla brought up, dealers seeking idiotic ADMs and lack of a manual at launch also didn’t help.
They reused a lot from prior gens, but at the end of the day to really drive cost into the dirt you want to be amortizing costs across 1 to 2 million vehicles over the course of a production run, not less than 100,000. EDIT: The 370Z sold 103K units globally.
That’s the issue with manuals as well — it’s hard to justify dumping money into them, especially when the buyer expectation is the manual is a “no cost option.” Personally I’ll PAY MORE over an automatic for a great manual. I understand the economics. I get it. Heck, the rough number as to why Porsche didn’t homologate a manual for the GT4 RS and Spyder RS? $5.8 million. That was the number. They’d recoup, but the meager profits they’d make wasn’t “worth the effort” to get it out the door.
I’d like cheaper cars too, but unfortunately that lack of scale matters. Sports cars are increasingly niche as people continue to move towards “one car solutions” (compromised as they’ve always been) or no fun at all as other costs go up. If you’ve got a better alternative, sure, vote with your wallet. If something seems like “a stretch” cut everything else to the bone to get the fun car (that you take care of and ideally keep 20-30 years). Though if everyone keeps saying no, they’ll all disappear.
I don’t think it’s the price so much as the value. Sure, it’s an old platform that’s been heavily amortized over decades and multiple models (and that’s fine). A standard LSD can’t possibly add much cost when even their competitors with less power have it. The Z is a little heavy as it always was, but that’s what the power is for, and it’s been a GT more than a sports car since the late ’70s, so that’s also OK, but making it a mediocre driving experience and putting in a squishy suspension was a choice. But, even then, OK, maybe that’s the market they want to hit, so why isn’t it quieter and more cosseting for those people?
It’s great there’s another sports car in a depressing market of eunuchmobiles, but that doesn’t mean people should settle for a half-assed one for full-assed price just because it’s there. It’s also not the only sports car available. The twins are more like the original Z than the Z is, they’re cheaper (and even about the same price as the 240Z when adjusted for inflation), and a better drive, if slower (and I’d argue they’re based on a much better platform—even though it’s older—but I’m heavily biased there). I’m sure the Miata is also a better drive and is focused on what it is rather than undecided like the Z seems to be, and it’s cheaper. Supra is about the same price and a better sports car all around, even if the looks are more polarizing. I’d rather they do well than not, but ultimately, there’s a reason I’ve seen maybe 5 of them when I see plenty of their competitors.
I don’t think people should settle.
However… we are kind of running out of alternatives. On the low-end for the old-school SCCA definition of a traditional sports car, you have the Miata and Toyobarus, but in the “go fast” spec, those are $37-40K cars for something we’d consider to be a very basic template. They’re good, don’t get me wrong, but there used to be TONS of those kind of cars. Today, we’re fortunate to still have TWO choices there, instead of just one.
Something with more cylinders and turbos is… going to cost more. Just what it is. We can’t get something for nothing.
Though yes, the base Z is… cost cut. That’s how they hit that $45K price. Yet again, it’s why a Miata “starts under $30K”, but the minimum spec you truly want? Is barely under $40K, mere dollars under depending on color.
@Ash78 hit it on the head that a big part of the issue is most people are functionally living under some level of austerity. Wages have not kept up with housing, healthcare and education (in particular, I’m aware other things have gone up), so the average person is putting their money towards the basics of living instead of fun things like sports cars.
Though the cars are going to cost… what the cars cost. To their credit, the manufacturers have kept in line (or below!) inflation. They ARE trying. The engineers and some executives WANT to sell sports cars. However, it gets increasingly hard to pitch these things if they don’t sell a ton.
And even the Z… across two generations across 22+ years, they only sold 270,000 globally between the 350Z (165Kish) and 370Z (103Kish). Yet, Toyota sold at least 3,000,000 of the 5th gen RAV4 in just the US over only 7 years, and about 6,500,000 worldwide. If you want great features and high quality for your dollar, that +2300% units sold in 1/3rd the time really matters.
At least Nissan is listening. Provide feedback. Hopefully it’ll get better.
All of that is why sports cars are rare in the market in general. This is specifically about the Z and its failing in comparison to its competitors, which as I already stated, I think is due to choices, not the price and not necessarily cost cutting. It’s neither sports car enough nor cruiser enough, so it doesn’t appeal to either camp, lacks an LSD vs cheaper competitors (that arguably don’t really need them) which isn’t just cost cutting, but shows a lack of seriousness or an unsubtle middle finger by the OEM to push buyers to a higher spec. If they’re going with it being a cruiser, then that’s fine, but then why bother with the turbos? Knock a chunk of money off and sell a non-turbo version sans LSD. Maybe the cruiser customers would want it, but wait, those buyers would want something quieter. That they are only now offering the manual with the NISMO goes to show how confused they are. With these kinds of cars, it’s not just about how many manuals they sell, it’s how many total cars the manuals help sell. Cars like this sell largely on image and a manual being offered still gives it cred as a driver’s car that it otherwise wouldn’t have. I could see if they didn’t have a manual transmission to use, but they sell it on the lower trim car, so I think that’s further indication of a lack of understanding about the product they’re selling.
I disagree that the desirable specs of the twins are the higher end versions. There is nothing of real value beyond the base (which is why I’d say go with the ’86 over the BRZ now, since Subaru dropped the lower spec). Heated seats, steering headlights more apt to total a car in a crash, a few pieces of slapped-on alcantara in the same boring black as the lower spec interior, and bigger wheels that weigh more and ride worse? (Though they do come with better tires, but the Primacys on the 17s are the most trash POS tires I’ve ever encountered.) The STI version of the BRZ with unnecessary damper improvements and big brakes that are only going to be worth it on a track? The stock brake pads kind of suck, but that’s a cheap easy fix vs overkill expensive OEM BBK or a DIY BBK that’s still a lot cheaper. Miata, I agree only because I don’t like convertibles—especially soft tops—so I’d only choose an RF (which I think is too expensive and I don’t like that it’s power, though I get it was to keep the BiW the same between the two), but I’d otherwise only be interested in the base model. The color options suck, but that’s the same even with the higher trim options other than the Soul red, which is expensive to repair and has become too common as it’s the only good color they have—they even added a “special” new color and it’s beige?! What is it a ’90s Camry? Leave that crap for the CXs. OK, now I’m ranting down a different path, so that’s enough.
At first I thought they gated the split-folding rear seats behind the GR86 Premium. You’re right, the base works. With the “go fast” options you’re still at $37K though. Want better tires? You can do better upgrading yourself and selling the stockers to someone, but you’re still around $38K then.
… and I say that as someone who dailied a similar kind of car many years ago. Yes, I want the go fast bits. I used ALL of the car ALL the time. It’s what made my commute (when I still had to) tolerable — driving the absolute nuts off of it. “Slow” car fast really works for a commute. I have fast cars — they sound better, but aren’t “more fun” in such a situation, the few times I’ve had to do it.
As for the Miata… the seats in the Recaro pack matter. As someone who dailied an NC-1, the worst thing about the stock seats for someone thin like myself was the sheer amount of time I was using my knees and or elbows to keep myself off the transmission tunnel or driver door panel. The rare times I had passengers they really didn’t like the Miata because they’d be up against the door. Possibly more than anything else I’ve owned. My Evo VIII held you in place, as the SSPs and 918 carbon buckets in the Porsches.
Moreover in a top-down car, the stereo DOES matter a bit. If you’re going to drive with the top down at 50+ mph, you need some minimum level of power to listen to music. You don’t need 800+ W, but you need at least 200W, and the stock system doesn’t do that. I had the Bose in my NC and on the highway it was still at 80-100% so I could listen to music while I was cruising in 6th to the fun backroads.
So sadly, a Miata has to be a Club with the perf pack, which is $39.5K in a terrible color, basically $40K in Soul Red.
So add in sales tax, reg, inspection, and… we’re at $40K with the go-fast bits (and better tires on the 86.)
I paid under $30k OTD for my GR86, though prices have gone up a couple grand. There are no go-fast options, merely some suspension and brake upgrade that I can’t see being needed on the street. As it is, the on-board display says I can hit 1g lateral on midrange General HPAS tires and the car rides better than I expected, so I don’t see a need for much improvement (an ex GF who hated my Focus ST loved the ride of the ’86). I live north of Boston and opportunities for getting near the handling limit without being a sociopath is rare and I’d honestly prefer even a bit lower limits that also didn’t illustrate the lack of power. People putting wider tires and not running on a track are nuts to me, but they’re probably the same kids who are afraid to drive with the nannies off. Brake pads make a big enough difference for street driving and are a couple hundred and I bought a second set of wheels and tires for under $2k, so about what I would have paid at the time for the most basic Civic hatch I could find with a manual and there’s no real need for extra wheels, but that’s what I do with my cars, keeping the stock wheels for winter tires. Stock seats are too supportive—I cut much of the lower bolster foam out, which stopped what felt like blood clots forming in my legs on longer drives. Only other issue was a lack of lumbar support, but I’m pretty sure that’s with all trims. A $15 blood pressure cuff stuffed behind the springs fixed that and it has an ’80s-tastic rubber bulb to adjust it that I actually rather like. Stock stereo isn’t good, but the upgraded trim isn’t supposed to be much better and it’s a loud car, anyway, so I don’t care enough to change anything and just don’t listen to classical in the car.
I’ll take your word on the Miata as it was too small for me to bother taking for a test drive. I couldn’t get comfortable sitting in it as I couldn’t recline the seat without jamming my knees into the dash and console, so it felt like an old formal Victorian chair.
If Nissan sold ~4,800 of these in the third quarter, then they weren’t in the Chicagoland region. I’ve seen two since they launched.
4800 through, not in, third quarter. So January through September.
Likely on track for 6000ish US units sold. That’s half the 370Z in its launch year.
How dare you call out my failed reading comprehension!?
Also, for what it’s worth, I’ve seen ONE new Z in the Boston area. ONE.
me too. I was pretty surprised.
That’s also shocking to me in the sun belt — when the first “rebooted” Z launched, they were freaking everywhere. I don’t think I’ve seen a single one of this generation yet.
I think a part of it is the market has just shifted so much in 25 years. A little more austerity, plus the Z isn’t really the sleeper value that it was in earlier generations, even considering inflation.
As Goof alluded to above, it’s a hard niche to maintain when we have so many more cars to choose from, many of which can be reasonably fun and also practical as commuters, kid duty, etc. Around 2000 the market was much more clearly segmented than today. I also see fewer sports cars in general, so it’s not just a Nissan Thing.
I wasn’t referring to you in the 3rd person, I was trying to reply to Trust Doesn’t Rust there. 😉
Three here in Tampa Bay area.
This is such a hilarious note. I don’t think I’ve ever even seen the term “glovebox damper” and I can’t tell you whether any of the cars I’ve owned have one.
Really? They’re fairly common, it’s just the strut that keeps the glovebox from flopping open with gravity, which can also damage the hinge. I don’t think I’ve seen many cars since maybe ~2010 that don’t have it. Cheap and easy way to improve your ergonomics. Unless we’re all thinking of something else…
Oh, I know what they are. It just seems a funny thing to list as one of the top couple of features you miss out on with the Z vs the Mustang.
Yeah, gotcha — the fact that anyone is calling it out as a feature is strange…but even more strange that they stratify their lineup with that exact feature.
IMO, do it for all your trimlines or just don’t do it at all. That’s a weird way to stratify a car like this.
Such a hilarious cost cutting measure. It can’t possibly save more than $3 at the OEM level, and the complexity of removing it for one variant has a cost
I believe it’s actually the vent that equalizes pressure in the glovebox while transiting hills at 10/10ths.
It was once common on British cars. There’s an inlet at the base of the windscreen that directs rainwater into the glovebox to keep the contents from drying out.
The issue is this should have been stick from the start and their dealers killed the demand for it. People bought other cars.
Certainly the Nismo should have been a manual from the get-go, but the Nismo trim has always been a small percent of Z sales. They have always cost a lot more than ever seemed reasonable to me compared to the standard Z. Missing a manual on the Nismo trim might have cost them a few dozen sales per year. Dealer markups and Nissan’s very slow rollout of them were probably what hurt sales the most. But the reality is that very few people buy sports cars anymore. I think part of the problem is that used cars last so long, any new sports car has to compete against thousands of used sporty cars available for a lot less money. That said, I will be test driving the new Z probably sometime in the next year. It’s on my shortlist for my next car.